From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | heonieb(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Uniquness of ctid |
Date: | 2023-07-19 21:39:09 |
Message-ID: | CAKFQuwYv8K3EtwXaYJhKiW5x54xJH_A=qy=gBXxzP4QvYpHc-g@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs |
On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 2:31 PM PG Doc comments form <noreply(at)postgresql(dot)org>
wrote:
> The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
>
> Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/15/ddl-system-columns.html
> Description:
>
> Hi,
> Looking at the explanation abour ctid, it is "The physical location of the
> row version within its table. "
> From that line, I think ctid is unique in the table.
>
Unique but not stable - if you give your actual record an ID value the
associated ctid for it may very well change over time and a given ctid can
be associated with any number of IDs
> And I also think ctid might be unique across the database since it is the
> physical location.
>
The concept doesn't even apply - the value itself only makes sense within a
given physical table. i.e., the table is implied. It's like saying "I live
at 123 Main St." to someone. Sure in any given place there can only be a
single 123 Main St. but that really isn't useful by itself. And to extend
back to the previous point, you may live there now but you will likely have
a different address in the future and someone else will have 123 Main St.
David J.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | PG Doc comments form | 2023-07-21 04:56:04 | to_char(numeric type, text) rounding instead of truncating |
Previous Message | PG Doc comments form | 2023-07-19 17:21:08 | Uniquness of ctid |